Race Tracks vs Casino's

[Racetime]

If you close half of the Casino's  at the Tracks and closed half the Tracks at the other half who's going to be thriving and who's going to be closing  ?

[Lockedin with Pace]

Pacer2 and "G" plan to build their own track and name it THRIVING DOWNS.

[Pacer 2]

If you close half of the Casino's  at the Tracks and closed half the Tracks at the other half who's going to be thriving and who's going to be closing  ?

  Both may be closing. Tracks provide plenty of support for casinos.

[Kenny]

  Both may be closing. Tracks provide plenty of support for casinos.

Just the opposite.

It is a historical and structural fact that racinos heavily subsidize horse racing, not the other way around. The statement "Tracks provide plenty of support for casinos" turns the real-world economic relationship completely on its head.In a racino ecosystem, the highly profitable slot machines, video lottery terminals (VLTs), and table games legally bankroll the struggling live racing operations.

[Brown jug]

irrelevant  question
states that understand it ensure there is a partnership and a split of funding
remember that casinos are a drain on economic activity, the casinos rake in millions which is withdrawn from the economy for ever and have no economic downstream in the area other than the few people who work there making minimum wage
racetracks and horses have a huge positive beneficial  economic impact as the racing itself is a very labor intensive industry providing many economic benefits downstream which i have posted before
please limit response from people who own at least 100% of a horse(s)
not interested in comments from people with no skin in the game
you know who you are

[captaintreacherous]

Spot on Brown Jug.

[Kenny]

irrelevant  question
states that understand it ensure there is a partnership and a split of funding
remember that casinos are a drain on economic activity, the casinos rake in millions which is withdrawn from the economy for ever and have no economic downstream in the area other than the few people who work there making minimum wage
racetracks and horses have a huge positive beneficial  economic impact as the racing itself is a very labor intensive industry providing many economic benefits downstream which i have posted before
please limit response from people who own at least 100% of a horse(s)
not interested in comments from people with no skin in the game
you know who you are

The casinos are entertainment that people actually want. Casinos support themselves. Racing, cannot support itself without MASSIVE HANDOUTS. Racing turned its back on the customer and the customer is gone. Take that HANDOUT money and use it for roads bridges or schools and you get a much bigger economic benefit and people aka voter actually want those things.

[G]

If it wasn't for the race tracks there would be no casino's. Everybody forgets that.

[Lockedin with Pace]

You are so wrong. Casinos don't need racetracks to make money, but racetracks need casinos to stay in business.

[tumbleweed]

You are so wrong. Casinos don't need racetracks to make money, but racetracks need casinos to stay in business.

You are correct!

[Justwatchingtheraces]

Spot on Brown Jug.

I totally agree that people who own horses have an economic impact on the state's economy. If that is the justification for receiving a handout, then the broader picture should be considered.

Does Ohio have more racehorses or non-race horses? How much of this handout, which is intended to promote economic growth, actually leaves the state?

According to the USTA, only 5,534 separate horses started races in Ohio in 2025. I do not know how many of those horses were owned by people from out of state. Clearly, the non-race horse population in Ohio is much larger. I can say that because of the AQHA annual report.

People who own non-race horses also contribute a tremendous amount of money to the economy. All horse owners buy hay and grain, pay veterinarians and farriers, and many own trucks and trailers as well.

This is like claiming that food stamps are great for the economy simply because people spend them on food. That line of thinking does not justify handouts when one group of horse owners requires no subsidies while representing a much larger portion of the horse industry.

[Kenny]

I totally agree that people who own horses have an economic impact on the state's economy. If that is the justification for receiving a handout, then the broader picture should be considered.

Does Ohio have more racehorses or non-race horses? How much of this handout, which is intended to promote economic growth, actually leaves the state?

According to the USTA, only 5,534 separate horses started races in Ohio in 2025. I do not know how many of those horses were owned by people from out of state. Clearly, the non-race horse population in Ohio is much larger. I can say that because of the AQHA annual report.

People who own non-race horses also contribute a tremendous amount of money to the economy. All horse owners buy hay and grain, pay veterinarians and farriers, and many own trucks and trailers as well.

This is like claiming that food stamps are great for the economy simply because people spend them on food. That line of thinking does not justify handouts when one group of horse owners requires no subsidies while representing a much larger portion of the horse industry.

Giving the money to almost anything would boast the economy. Using it for infrastructure has a similar but larger direct impact AND a secondary impact of making business easier. On top of that, people want infrastructure much more than they care about racing. I would propose using the money to reduce taxes.  If racing cannot stand on its own, why should it exist? Why should a private business )casino) be required to keep a business (racing) they lose money on? All that land used by racetracks could be put to more valuable uses. The racing industry better figure out a way to support itself or at somepoint it will become much smaller or disappear.  Wake up!

[Justwatchingtheraces]

Giving the money to almost anything would boast the economy. Using it for infrastructure has a similar but larger direct impact AND a secondary impact of making business easier. On top of that, people want infrastructure much more than they care about racing. I would propose using the money to reduce taxes.  If racing cannot stand on its own, why should it exist? Why should a private business )casino) be required to keep a business (racing) they lose money on? All that land used by racetracks could be put to more valuable uses. The racing industry better figure out a way to support itself or at somepoint it will become much smaller or disappear.  Wake up!

100% agree but many people lean on this economic impact it has on agriculture and everything else. I like the idea of using that money to lower taxes. Maybe Pacer can give us his unbiased expert opinion on this.